home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1990s
/
Time_Almanac_1990s_SoftKey_1994.iso
/
time
/
060793
/
06079923.000
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
8KB
|
153 lines
<text id=93TT1834>
<title>
June 07, 1993: Bypassing The Brokers
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1993
Jun. 07, 1993 The Incredible Shrinking President
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
WALL STREET, Page 42
Bypassing The Brokers
</hdr>
<body>
<p>Savvy little guys use Wall Street's own computers to outsmart
market pros
</p>
<p>By RICHARD BEHAR
</p>
<p> Gary Ciuffetelli once scraped out a living in a machine shop,
but now he's getting ready to "ride a wave," as they say at
All-Tech Investment Group in Suffern, New York. Dressed in shorts
and a T shirt, the 33-year-old trader stares at a computer screen
linked to the National Association of Securities Dealers Automated
Quotation System (NASDAQ), the world's second largest stock
market after the New York Stock Exchange. Sensing that Lotus
stock is starting to climb, Ciuffetelli tells an All-Tech clerk
to buy 1,000 shares. The clerk presses a few buttons on his
keyboard, and the deal is automatically made for $32 a share.
Minutes later, the ex-machinist sells. "Hallelujah, I made an
eighth of a point!" shouts Ciuffetelli. By day's end, 58 trades
later and $900 richer, he is ready to return to his family's
trailer home.
</p>
<p> For Ciuffetelli and his fellow small traders, who hope to parlay
tiny price fluctuations into handsome profits, All-Tech and
dozens of similar firms have become Wall Street's version of
off-track betting parlors. Visitors to the Suffern office find
plumbers, bartenders, retirees and out-of-work lawyers crammed
elbow to elbow in nine rooms filled with clerks, computer screens
and high hopes. The screens show the various "bid" and "asked"
prices offered by dozens of marketmakers--firms such as Goldman
Sachs and Morgan Stanley that deal in specific stocks.
</p>
<p> While the quoted prices appear to move in concert, a few sometimes
lag behind, creating brief price differentials that clients
spot and pounce on. Customers who correctly predict the direction
of a stock can reap $250 (less commissions) for each quarter-point
gain on a 1,000-share bet. But "riding a wave" is not so easy:
a stock can blip upward, enticing a small trader to buy it,
and then come tumbling down. "Oh my God!" cries a forty something
beautician as she loses $250 in a split-second transaction involving
Genzyme, a biotechnology firm. "This has been the longest trade
of my life."
</p>
<p> At a time when stockbrokers garner about as much trust as politicians
and journalists, All-Tech's do-it-yourself trading generates
an astonishing total of nearly 2% of the national over-the-counter
market's $5.2 billion of daily volume. Founded in 1988, the
firm now includes thriving branches in Dallas and Minneapolis.
This week All-Tech is opening its first New York City office.
"We're turning people away every day because we don't have enough
terminals," boasts chief executive Harvey Houtkin. "We could
be the largest brokerage in the country in a year."
</p>
<p> Not if the National Association of Securities Dealers can help
it. The trade group, which represents 470 marketmakers, has
fired off repeated barrages of new rules aimed at crippling
Houtkin's business. The association even threatens to cut him
off by scrapping the order-execution capability of its advanced
computer system, which it touts in TV ads as "the stock market
for the next hundred years." Why the hysteria? Houtkin's clients
stir up "waves of orders that increase short-term volatility,"
charges Richard Ketchum, chief operating officer of the dealers'
group. "This substantially increases the risk for marketmakers,
which winds up costing the individual investor more money."
</p>
<p> Houtkin says he is merely using technology to give the little
guy an even break. Under the small-order system, each marketmaker
must trade at the displayed quote price with no chance to adjust
to whatever other firms are doing. The system simply assigns
the transaction to the marketmaker with the highest bid or
lowest offer at the time. Result: if a Merrill Lynch specialist
happens to be away from his desk when a stock starts moving,
a savvy bartender could swiftly pinch $250 from his hide for
every quarter-point change in price. Without the automated system,
Houtkin's clients would have to call brokers and have them place
orders with a marketmaker. By the time all that was done, the
price gap would probably have vanished.
</p>
<p> The roots of the feud between Houtkin and the dealers go back
to 1975, when Congress first nudged regulators to have marketmakers
install computerized order systems to make stock trading more
efficient. Congress said the firms should be encouraged to do
so even if it meant that orders could be ``executed without
the participation of a dealer." The securities group unveiled
its small-order system with great fanfare a decade later. But
it was not until many marketmakers failed to honor their quoted
prices in the Crash of 1987 that the group ordered all members
to use the automated system.
</p>
<p> The association now says it never intended the system to be
used for rapid-fire trading, particularly at the expense of
its own marketmakers. Fighting back, the group has limited
the shares traded on the system to no more than 1,000 per transaction,
and has restricted the number of trades for each account to
just 10 a day. But All-Tech customers simply--and legally--open numerous accounts under different names. Meanwhile,
Houtkin has sued the Securities and Exchange Commission in federal
court to overturn the rules.
</p>
<p> Defenders of Houtkin say the burden of proof is on dealers to
show that small-order players really are harming the market.
After all, these supporters contend, no market maker has bailed
out of the dealers' association, and many Wall Street firms
enjoyed record profits in the first quarter of this year. In
response, the association sent the SEC a study last month that
purports to show that traders using the system drove down the
price of nine stocks, mostly health-care firms, during two weeks
in February and March.
</p>
<p> Other market watchers blame the drops on factors ranging from
disappointing corporate announcements to investor fears about
President Clinton's health reforms. "The NASD study is a pile
of crap," says Morris Mendelson, a professor of finance at the
University of Pennsylvania. "Dammit, these are retail customers
at All-Tech! Just because they happen to be more interested
in the market than the average investor, that's no reason to
keep them out." That view is echoed by Edward Fleischman, a
former SEC commissioner, who wonders, "How can the SEC justify
approving any rule that takes liquidity out of the market? Once
you've given people the capability of direct trading, you can't
take it away."
</p>
<p> While the sides battle it out in court, Houtkin plans to keep
his revolution moving ahead, opening new branches and even placing
computers in customers' homes so they can ride waves without
getting dressed. "This is exhilarating," says 56-year-old Don
Traponese, a high school dropout who earns $18,000 a year cutting
hair. "I wish I could go to the races and be as successful as
I am here." While Traponese has good days and bad days at All-Tech,
he estimates that his part-time trading brings in about $12,000
a year. "Brokers over the phone will quote me higher prices
than what I can see for myself is available on the screens,"
he says. "I think the powers that be are trying to keep us little
guys down."
</p>
</body>
</article>
</text>